[bryony]

Ignoring the morality question which is the bigger one, older people having babies is actually good for the gene pool. If you make it to old age, you have demonstrated that your genetic makeup is good for survival and longevity. Just what you would want in a gene pool. I don't think the morality side of it belongs on this forum. And it's always better to eat someone else's jelly beans, if they eat them with you.

Hmmm. If you have that genetic makeup, you don't need to wait until old age to father the kids, because they will inherit those qualities if you start early; but I'm sure I've read that sperm from older people tends to be more deformed. (God knows what the sperm from older people who take estrogen is like).

Of course, if you want to be a really harsh Darwinist, you could say that if every father waited until old age, then the ones who produce deformed sperm in old age will die out, and that _will_ strengthen the gene pool. But, as long as young people keep breeding, the ones who wait until old age, in my view, will be disadvantaged.

It's all rather moot, as modern society promotes reverse evolution; in high-welfare countries, successful genes produce productive, intelligent people who work hard and pay taxes, and usually restrict the number of kids they have in order to care better for the ones that they do have; they generally can't afford more because they pay so much tax in order to provide for the inheritors of the less successful genes. These people are actively encouraged by the state to breed endlessly as it becomes their major form of income, and they will very soon outnumber the useful members of society, in the UK at least. That's probably why we have opened the doors to mass immigration, but the joke is that many of them come here to claim benefit.

The time of the "Marching Morons" is upon us; and we've made a head start by electing them to represent us in our parliament.

B. (not in any way discussing morality)